Who is responsible for advising purchasers that a road is private/unadopted?

[Bouleversee]

I think mine goes back to 1918. That's the date on the first document I have, anyway. The payment has nothing to do with the council; it is to the village estate company.

[supremetwo]

I think mine goes back to 1918. That's the date on the first document I have, anyway. The payment has nothing to do with the council; it is to the village estate company.

Private Company?

Any details describing the exact use of this payment?

[AF62]

So in essence the issues are -

* The road outside your house appears to be a private road not adopted by the council, but nobody seems to know who owns it.
* You were not told it was a private road when you bought the freehold
* There are potholes in the road, and although the council repaired them in the past they won't do now they know it is not adopted
* The road is shown as a bridleway on maps, so can you even drive down it
* Although you own the freehold of your house you have an obligation to pay a charge to a management company, apparently for "running the village"

To be honest, I cannot see any link with between the last item and the first four.

The last one seems to be a straightforward question to the management company of "what am I paying for, why do I have to, show me the paperwork that proves it".

With the first four, until you find out who actually owns the road I can't see the issue going anywhere.

[Bouleversee]

What makes you think I am not trying to find out the ownership of the road? (Incidentally, a longish term resident who supplied me with the copy of the letter from the council dated July 1999 (which I note refers to the road as a carriageway), saying they were going to resurface the road that August, has just 'phoned me and says that that was the first time tarmac was laid, and it was at the instigation of one of the residents but the residents weren't charged for it. She also said the council owned the road (which contradicts some paperwork I have, mentioned some time ago). Have you read the whole thread?

The limited company manages the village (they don't do anything else and there is a voluntary committee of residents as well as a paid manager) and the charges which I am obliged to pay include maintaining the roads in the village, for which there is a sinking fund, but not mine apparently. We were told the council maintained ours; other people have been told the village company does and that is covered by our payment.

The link depends on who owns the road, doesn't it? If the village company does (as previously stated, they have signed some agreements as owners) it can hardly argue that the village boundary is my fence and so they are not responsible and one could argue that it should be included in the village roads they maintain at present since the residents on this side of the road pay into the amenity fund for the other roads. Chances are we'll fall between all stools but the important thing is to establish the facts so that a sale is not aborted or delayed when any of us in the lane want to move.

The road is shown as a bridleway on the recent map referred to but I will try to access earlier versions and possibly challenge its accuracy. It certainly was a highway all the way through in years gone by and all the owners of the houses on this end of it have no other access to them and have driven motor vehicles over it for more than 20 years so how can all of it be a bridleway? A 'no through road' sign has appeared at the entrance which I am pretty sure was not there when we moved here in 2008.

I'm afraid I am not going to make any progress with my research if I have to keep repeating myself on here, so please read the thread before asking questions. We seem to have digressed somewhat from my OP.

[johnhemming]

I did handle some casework about who owns the land if a road is narrowed and found that it was the people on each side of the road. Hence it is not impossible that this applies in your case. If it is not registered land it could be that you own it, it could also be that the original developers own it (they may have been liquidated decades ago).

It really comes down to a review of the conveyancing documents going back to the original lease.

Councils normally have some records as to which land they own. In Birmingham it was called the City Terrier. You should be able to find out if the council believe they own it. That would be covered under FoI I would think.

That, however, does not make them necessarily responsible for maintaining it - although it would help with the arguments about it.

[AF62]

What makes you think I am not trying to find out the ownership of the road? (Incidentally, a longish term resident who supplied me with the copy of the letter from the council dated July 1999 (which I note refers to the road as a carriageway), saying they were going to resurface the road that August, has just 'phoned me and says that that was the first time tarmac was laid, and it was at the instigation of one of the residents but the residents weren't charged for it. She also said the council owned the road (which contradicts some paperwork I have, mentioned some time ago). Have you read the whole thread?

The limited company manages the village (they don't do anything else and there is a voluntary committee of residents as well as a paid manager) and the charges which I am obliged to pay include maintaining the roads in the village, for which there is a sinking fund, but not mine apparently. We were told the council maintained ours; other people have been told the village company does and that is covered by our payment.

The link depends on who owns the road, doesn't it? If the village company does (as previously stated, they have signed some agreements as owners) it can hardly argue that the village boundary is my fence and so they are not responsible and one could argue that it should be included in the village roads they maintain at present since the residents on this side of the road pay into the amenity fund for the other roads. Chances are we'll fall between all stools but the important thing is to establish the facts so that a sale is not aborted or delayed when any of us in the lane want to move.

The road is shown as a bridleway on the recent map referred to but I will try to access earlier versions and possibly challenge its accuracy. It certainly was a highway all the way through in years gone by and all the owners of the houses on this end of it have no other access to them and have driven motor vehicles over it for more than 20 years so how can all of it be a bridleway? A 'no through road' sign has appeared at the entrance which I am pretty sure was not there when we moved here in 2008.

I'm afraid I am not going to make any progress with my research if I have to keep repeating myself on here, so please read the thread before asking questions. We seem to have digressed somewhat from my OP.

There seems to be a lot of "he said, she said".

Until you establish who owns the road the issue with the management company is irrelevant.

[Bouleversee]

AF62 -


"Until you establish who owns the road the issue with the management company is irrelevant."

That is stating the obvious and it's why I'll be spending my time doing that rather than on here. I'm not a complete idiot.

[9873210]

The road is shown as a bridleway on the recent map referred to but I will try to access earlier versions and possibly challenge its accuracy. It certainly was a highway all the way through in years gone by and all the owners of the houses on this end of it have no other access to them and have driven motor vehicles over it for more than 20 years so how can all of it be a bridleway? A 'no through road' sign has appeared at the entrance which I am pretty sure was not there when we moved here in 2008.

The bridleway is perhaps a red herring. It is not uncommon for a bridleway to be used as a driveway or farm track,

The bridleway grants the public the right it ride horses on the road but it does not prevent people having and using a private right to motor on it. Owning the land, permission of the owner or holding an easement would grant a private right. In this case it seems likely the house holders have, if nothing else, at least an easement for access.

[Clitheroekid]

The limited company manages the village (they don't do anything else and there is a voluntary committee of residents as well as a paid manager) and the charges which I am obliged to pay include maintaining the roads in the village ...

This really is quite bizarre. What sort of village is it that doesn't appear to have any publicly maintained roads going through it? Is it in some form of private estate? It's not St George's Hill by any chance?

[Bouleversee]

No, it's not St George's Hill.

[beeswax]

It may be a minor point but does the LA/Council come and empty all the bins using that road or do you and others have to take them to a certain point?

There is a small road access to some properties near me and they too have been told they are responsible for the maintenance and repairs and they have to take the bins ie five houses and ten bins sometime to where their road meets the main one that is maintained by the LA..

What about street lighting? Ditto questions? Sewers/Mains water supply ditto?

If the LA etc use your road you may have a case for asking for help with maintenance costs?

[Bouleversee]

They do collect our rubbish but not with those vehicles which pick up bins and tip them into the vehicle. We have rubbish bags for general waste and lidded plastic boxes for papers and plastics. They use smaller vehicles and the men tip them in. No street lighting in the lane itself. I have an old fashioned lamppost just inside my hedge which is on my bill and switched from my house; not very often on, however. We are supposed to leave it at our drive entrance but since I can't carry the boxes, by arrangement they take mine from the house.

[Bouleversee]

By strange coincidence, there is an article on the subject of unadopted roads on page 61 of the Money section in today's Times, which echoes my views. If you don't subscribe, you may still be able to get it with the following link if you Google it. I hope some of you will feel inclined to sign the petition on the government's website:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the- ... -dbs3s3tnr

[johnhemming]

Your situation is not unique and I have dealt with other similar situations. Given how short local authorities are of spare cash (I was a councillor for 18 years) I would be surprised to see any systemic shift. To a great extent with new build it is the responsibility of the developer to get this right. It is the responsibility of the conveyancer to warn purchasers of things like unadopted roads.

[Mike88]

Your situation is not unique and I have dealt with other similar situations. Given how short local authorities are of spare cash (I was a councillor for 18 years) I would be surprised to see any systemic shift. To a great extent with new build it is the responsibility of the developer to get this right. It is the responsibility of the conveyancer to warn purchasers of things like unadopted roads.

In this instance how would the conveyancer know?

[johnhemming]

In this instance how would the conveyancer know?

I tried to post an extract from Clitheroekid's post which is on the first page of this thread which explains the answer to that question. I did this from my mobile which makes typing a response myself harder. It has either been deleted or my mobile failed to post it correctly. The detailed answer is, however, on the first page of this thread.

The problem from the OPs point of view is that if we changed the law to force LAs to adopt roads without the additional funding that would be a massive amount of cash that LA's don't have. Hence although you may get cuddly words from the government I don't expect anything substantial to happen.

[GoSeigen]

Your situation is not unique and I have dealt with other similar situations. Given how short local authorities are of spare cash (I was a councillor for 18 years) I would be surprised to see any systemic shift. To a great extent with new build it is the responsibility of the developer to get this right. It is the responsibility of the conveyancer to warn purchasers of things like unadopted roads.

In this instance how would the conveyancer know?

Mike88,

This is the earlier post by Clitheroekid (that JohnHemming was referring to) which explains how a conveyancer would know:

viewtopic.php?p=151960#p151960


GS

[Bouleversee]

So we would probably all have to pay more council tax but that would be fairer than the present system where some of us have to pay twice or in my case 3 times. I agree with the person in the article who said that she hadn't really bought a freehold.

[beeswax]

Isn't this why we pay Solicitors to advise ALL purchases what the situation is including what roads are not adopted and therefore they will have to pay for the upkeep?

You can't expect LA's to adopt ALL these roads as some could be miles long to a single property and then someone will ask they should provide street lights and other council services..

Buyer beware is pretty good advice...

[johnhemming]

There are two separate financial issues.

One is the one off capital cost of bringing roads up to a standard.

The second is the continuing maintenance cost.

You might be able to negotiate with the local authority that if you and your neighbours ensure the road is brought up to standard then the council takes over the maintenance.

However in the end you and your neighbours will have to decide how important the state of the road is to you. Even if there was a willingness in government to actually do something about this it will take some time. Hence it might be a good idea to consider your alternatives:
https://www.paintpeople.co.uk/products/ ... gIZXvD_BwE

I used something like the above for a pothole in a car park that I own (to my offices) and for about £60 the job was done.

The problem with potholes is that if they are not filled in they grow.